The evidence, though largely circumstantial, was nevertheless substantial,” the court said. “That evidence readily supports the determination that a rational finder of fact could (and in fact did) deem the evidence adequate to support each conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Islamophobia and a Modern Witch Hunt

A ‘substantial’ amount of ‘circumstantial’ evidence does not equate into rationale. That’s extremely presumptuous and bluntly asinine. It assumes enervating a person with verbose and insignificant baloney presumes truth. An hour of viewing Fox news refutes such absurd assumption. Furthermore, I capitulate that ‘substantial’ is the most accurate adjective above. The unwonted court’s transcripts of anecdotal evidence in relation to a ‘possible’ conspiracy artifice ranged in the unbelievable estimate of a whopping thousands of pages. The Peloponnesian War written by Thucydides, a real war of authentic facts and more credible testimonies, reached its concise and valuable zenith of 300 pages. Inundating an individual person’s life under a microscope to accumulate a ‘substantial’ amount of ‘circumstantial’ evidence tacitly avers the other immune citizens do not sustain such a lifestyle as those examined like specimens on a cutting table, it’s simply not true. Others have done far worse, yet Muslim Americans are held in higher accountability, and that’s injustice. Muslim Americans are stepping on crackers while charlatans as Jason Kellhofer screams at each crackle a stethoscope reveals. Entirely oblivious to the parade of other Americans around him. This pogrom highlights a paramount example of the distinction between law and justice. Power wields the former, wisdom the latter.

The blustering US government and Crusading toady Kellhofer callously placed all defendants under a Scanning Transmission Electron Holography microscope, capriciously employed tiny snippets of edited recordings from casual railleries conflated out of context, and then denied the appellants and jury and public access to that context for canvassing. For example, the prosecution submitted a public workout video of Hassan exercising in a gym-claiming it was terrorist training- but refused to allow the comment by Hassan in the message board below his video with him castigating terrorism. Furthermore, Boyce petitioned the appeals court that the defense was not permitted to cross examine Hassan and Yaghi’s Facebook posts to determine who ‘liked’ and ‘shared’ such links, what comments under these posts entailed, and under what context. As Boyce vehemently protested in the appeals trial about the government denying context, “it cut our abilities to cross examine significantly, and by some of the rulings, it gutted our defense.” The US government also snubbed evidence of Yaghi’s motive for traveling to Jordan by not acknowledging proof of his potential bride. But Hysen Sherifi’s own words accentuate Boyce’s complaint, “when I sent Mr. McAfee to ask for these recordings, they said we’re not going to give them to you. I had made it clear that I did not want to come back to America… They set me up. They entrapped me to come back to this country, but they did not give those chats. Why?” One could argue such denial of access is the equivalent of forging a spurious narrative, not so distant from such nefarious and corrupt forgery as in the Dreyfus Affair.

Although the pharisaical Kellhofer dissembled at the appeals conference that he was not convicting the 7 men because of their innate spiritual beliefs on ‘jihad’ but on an extraterrestrial terrorist ideology, the complete kangaroo jeremiad of Kellhofer’s prosecution and the US government’s witnesses and Judge Flanagan-during the past court trial-repeatedly arrogated the vituperative tautology over the sole interpretation of jihad-along with other cardinal religious terms-as restricted to violence. They made little distinction between violent jihad and the higher non-violent forms of jihad. Thousands of pages of court transcripts are inundated with the incubus and behemoth term ‘jihad’ in them. Kellhofer even paid for the subterfuge testimony of Counter Terrorism cretin Evan Kohlmann to hijack Islam and augment such fabricated hyperboles.

Kohlmann’s passionate and honest fight against terrorism -not Islam- includes such amazing accolades as not refusing ‘one’ single offer to testify as an expert witness to enliven carceral terrorist trials. Sounds more like a mercenary-for-hire or cheap street harlot to me. His video the Al Qaida Plan, was shown at trials of detainees at Guantanamo Bay where the chief prosecutor of the Guantanamo tribunal conceded that Kohlmann’s dilettante video was extremely prejudicial. At one trial, Kohlmann testified on the Bangladeshi Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami, but under cross examination it was shockingly exposed that he never professionally published anything for peer review on the terrorist coterie, never visited Bangladesh, and confessed he was unaware of the name of the leader for the aforementioned faction. Kohlmann has never experienced any hostile battlefield-Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Palestine, Syria, etc- to witness firsthand, the terrorist engagements he claims ruminant expertise upon. And Kohlmann also admitted-after testifying on Arabic terms and meanings- he doesn’t know Arabic. This supposed terrorist expert is a modern witch doctor whose last encounter or debate with me on Tweeter validated his abysmal intellect. After publicly challenging the numismatist Kohmann to provide the correct transliterations of the word ‘martyr’ and ‘witness’ in Arabic, he jilted my query and resigned in cricket chirping silence (the court documents indicate the US government, on behalf of Kohlmann’s advice, confused the English transliterations of the Arabic words for martyr and witness, incorrectly defined Fard Al Ayn, claimed ‘marriage’ and other benign common English phrases were encryption for terrorism, and much more).